Cyr v. Reliance Standard
|Plaintiff - Appellee,:
||LAURA A. CYR
|Defendant - Appellant,:
||RELIANCE STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois corporation
||SECRETARY OF LABOR
||December 31, 2007
||U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
|Nature of Suit:
We have the following opinions for this case:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|June 22, 2011
Filed opinion (ALEX KOZINSKI, MARY M. SCHROEDER, STEPHEN R. REINHARDT, SIDNEY R. THOMAS, BARRY G. SILVERMAN, RAYMOND C. FISHER, MARSHA S. BERZON, RICHARD R. CLIFTON, JAY S. BYBEE, MILAN D. SMITH, JR. and N. RANDY SMITH) (Judge RRC authoring). We agreed to hear this case en banc in order to reconsider our precedent as to which parties may be sued as defendants in actions for benefits under 29 U.S.C. 1132(a)(1)(B), part of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, better known as ERISA. Some of our previous decisions have indicated that only a benefit plan itself or the plan administrator of a benefit plan covered under ERISA is a proper defendant in a lawsuit under that provision. We conclude that the statute does not support that limitation, however, and that an entity other than the plan itself or the plan administrator may be sued under that statute in appropriate circumstances. We overrule our prior decisions to the contrary. To apply that decision and to resolve other issues raised in this appeal, we transfer the case back to the three-judge panel to which this case was previously assigned. (See opinion for full text). Implementing this conclusion in this case and resolving the other issues raised in this appeal does not require the participation of this en banc panel. The case is therefore transferred back to the previously assigned three-judge panel for further consideration and action consistent with this opinion. TRANSFERRED TO PREVIOUSLY ASSIGNED THREE-JUDGE PANEL.  [07-56869, 08-55234]
|December 2, 2010
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?